https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350884 --- Comment #47 from Brandon Nielsen <nielsenb@xxxxxxxxxxx> --- Circling back to splitting this into multiple SPEC files, would that be allowed? They would all share the same source file, which seems like it may be confusing. But this SPEC file is getting unwieldy. I also think it would help clean up some of the ugliness I forced on myself by doing a combined tree build. I have figured out the issue with requiring -B to build using the resulting compiler. The final clue came from a mailing list post[0], basically, I shouldn't have been deleting the unprefixed binaries in /usr/msp430-elf/msp430-elf/bin. Unfortunately they are duplicates of the prefixed binaries, so I guess I'll just symlink the prefixed ones in /usr/msp430-elf/bin to the expected path? Feels gross. There might be a better solution based on --with-as and --with-ld flags[1]. Once I've cleaned up that SPEC file and gotten it building I'll link it up. Still haven't figured out why I can't get make check to work. Thanks for sticking with this boondoggle. [0] - https://sourceware.org/pipermail/crossgcc/2001-June/008966.html [1] - https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc-help/2006-04/msg00102.html -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
